I would prefer it if you came tomorrow
I would prefer you coming tomorrow

Hallo Sammy,
ist dann das 'erst' schon drin?

LG

sorry, no it isn't. In that case: I would prefer it if you didn't come until tomorrow.

danke :-)

Literally: I prefer that you not come until tomorrow.

But #3 with 'I would prefer it' is more idiomatic, or perhaps even 'I would prefer it if you could/would wait and come tomorrow.'

#5 is doubly weird in AE, since 'I should' in this sense is obsolete and 'meet' means 'kennenlernen' (BE 'meet' i.S.v. 'treffen' = AE 'meet with').

hm
Das ist Unsinn.

@ anne: Your sentence should be phrased

either: 'Ich zöge es vor, wenn du erst morgen kommst.' . . .

or: 'Ich ziehe es vor, dass du erst morgen kommst.' . . .

(Is that what you are getting at in #7, Paula?) . . .

hm
Mit einem Satz wie "I should prefer Jane to meet her tomorrow" können beide Aussagen gemacht werden. Eine Möglichkeit wäre: "Mir wäre lieber, Jane träfe sie/sich mit ihr morgen", und dieser Satz zielt nicht notwendigerweise auf den Umstand ab, dass zwei Leute sich kennen lernen wollen.Und klingt auch keinesfalls seltsam.

Daddy
Ja.

re #9: Yes, I realize that 'meet' has two meanings in BE, but since it's not in the original sentence here anyway, it's better just to use 'come,' which is less confusing.

However, 'I should' in this sense is largely outdated in BE and completely obsolete in AE. 'I should' used to mean (also) 'Ich würde,' but in modern English it normally only means 'Ich sollte,' so it is out of place here. Please see the archive (Suche in allen Foren) for previous discussions, e.g.,

related discussion: We should be much obliged - Wir wären Ihnen ...



#8: There are also various options in English.

Ich zöge es vor, wenn ... =
(normal) I would prefer it if you didn't come until tomorrow
(more formal) I would prefer that you not come until tomorrow

Ich ziehe es vor, dass ... =
(more formal and less polite) I prefer you not to come until tomorrow
(quite formal and peremptory) I prefer that you not come ...

The difference between 'if' and 'that' is not important; the meaning of the sentence doesn't change. The only real difference is in how natural and polite the sentence sounds. The English version with 'would' is the most idiomatic, which is why sammy suggested it.

hm
Wie ist es dann aber möglich, dass Handbücher zu Übersetzungstechniken immer noch diese Varianten als zulässige Möglichkeit anbieten? Zum Beispiel Wolf Friedrich "Technik des Übersetzens".

Which variant are you talking about? 'I should'?

Because they're old-fashioned textbooks?

That is -- zulässig, well, okay. It's not grammatically wrong, since it used to be right. But you should just be aware that it will sound very stiff, because it's no longer what most people actually say.

hm
Die neueste Ausgabe, nicht einmal ein Jahr alt.

maybe an old-fashioned author? ;-)

@H.B. (or Paula): a new edition of such a book doesn't guarantee the inclusion of the latest changes; the dictionary's original copyright date could be decades ago.

Sammy
nein

@ #11, Re #8:

In #8 I was strictly getting at the (plain[ly]) wrong phrasing of the sentence . . .

(and tried to bridge the gap opening between you and P. at #7) . . .

So, to me, your #11 is/sounds (largely) hypothetical . . .

Version/letzte Überarbeitung aus 2003 mit veränderten Beispielsätzen.

@Paula: regardless of what your little book says, I have to agree with hm's assessment.

Sammy
Da ich kein Englisch-Native bin, bin ich nicht in der Lage, hier etwas abschließend sagen zu können. Nur so viel, dieses Buch wird hier an vielen Schulen benutzt. Übrigens, ich bin nicht Paula. Aber ich kenne das Buch auch.

@H.B.: Having studied foreign languages myself, I know that some dictionaries, even though they have a recent publishing date, can be quite outdated/lagging, not to say old-fashioned. Also, they may contain more of what the editors find to be the proper way of saying things rather than what is actually being said by the populace using whatever language it might be. I'm not familiar with Wolf Friedrich and consequently don't know what type of English he's most familiar with. Apparently, however, not so much the current lingo. :-)

It's actually an interesting question, and the people whose answers you really need to hear are native or near-native BE speakers, because they're the ones who would use it if at all.

I would suggest starting a new thread in the Sprachlabor -- something like 'I should ' vs. 'I would'? -- and seeing what turns up. My prediction is that even most fairly traditional BE speakers wouldn't really use 'should' themselves anymore, though they might still see it occasionally in formal writing. But I could just be wrong. (-:

And there also could be slight differences depending on the main verb. To me 'I should like to' or 'I should prefer to' might be a little more likely than, say, 'In your place I should accept the offer.' One that's still fairly common in BE might be 'I should think,' almost as a sort of fixed phrase; but 'I should suggest' seems less likely. Though, again, I could be wrong on any of those.

It's definitely correct in historical settings. I recently saw the new BBC film of 'Sense and Sensibility' and there it really grated on me that none of the very British characters ever said 'I should,' only 'I would.' Very anachronistic, I would have thought. But nowadays, using it seems a bit anachronistic in the other direction.

Talking of outdated expressions: "Ich zöge es vor" is a good example. In modern German you would say "Mir wäre es lieber"


@Paula: Could you please indicate the exact page in Friedrich's excellent textbook you are referring to and maybe even quote the example in question. This would make the discussion less abstract.

I forgot to link this other thread, so just in case H.B. and/or the so polite Paula might still be interested, here it is.

related discussion: I / we should (prefer, like, think, suggest) ...

If Prof. Friedrich is still living, perhaps it would be a kindness to write to him or his publishers. (-:

hm
Bin mir sicher, ob man nun so weit gehen sollte und Friedrich anmorst. Die Idee mit dem Sprachlabor begrüße ich.

Should wird haufiger in bestimmte Regionen in den UK benutzt. Ich komme persoenlich vom Sueden und nutzte es deshalb in den oben genannte Weise nicht mehr aber habe einige Freunde aus Nord England, die should im Alltag nutzten. Ich kenne mich nicht aus mit Wales, Schottland oder Irland.

Ich finde es auch ein interessantes Thema.

'Anmorst'?

Anmorst: Ich nehme an, von "morsen" - dieser Gebrauch war mir aber auch unbekannt ;-)

Um ...

'Morsen'?

(Signal him in Morse code? Send him a mortar and pestle in the mail?)

anmorsen - slang for kontaktieren (anschreiben, etc.)

@ 29: 'anmorst' ? . . .

Perhaps (the past tense of) (a post morten) 'an-morsen' ? . . . ;-)))

"anmorsen" - nie gehört! Vielleicht Teenie-Jargon?